What are your thoughts?

(CNN) -- Photon torpedoes and proton torpedoes. Warp speed and hyperspace.

Shhh! Don't tell anyone, but the "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" universes have quite a bit in common.

Still, there are also enough differences that the eternal franchise versus franchise debate still tends to unfold with all the fireworks of a big-budget action sequence.

With "Star Trek Into Darkness" coming out in a couple of days and George Lucas' birthday on Tuesday, May 14, we saw an opportunity to dive back into this neverending back-and-forth for clues about what lies in store for the tech world. And, in turn, we hope to look at what that says about us as humans.

New 'Star Trek' mission: Your questions!

We're asking you, the reader, to go through the gallery above and think about the technology in the "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" universes. How are they different, and how are they the same? Which vision do you think would be most advantageous for the future of humanity and other alien races we may or may not befriend?

Read more about the 'Star Trek' vs. 'Star Wars' debate

To organize the discussion a bit, we broke up the analysis into five categories with overlap between the worlds: weapons, ships, biotech, robotics and everyday tools.

Perhaps it's no wonder the debate continues. Science fiction offers competing visions of what we as people might become. Nothing less than our future is at stake.


Views: 149

Replies to This Discussion

As to competing visions of who we might become, I much prefer the realism of Star Trek to the woo of Star Wars.

This is really the heart of the matter for me. Trek is great sci fi, and I love sci fi. Wars is space fantasy, something that is less appealing to me, so even if Wars is a great example of the genre, it's not my bag. The worst of Trek is better than the best of Wars because of the woo - woo is "pervy", either you like it for unexplainable reasons or you don't, where as sci fi is about ideas, so there can be an angle of interest for anyone, even if you don't favor the aesthetic.

I like how the debate underlines this aspect, the religiousness of Wars, it's fans enjoy that pretend cult aspect, I don't.

Here's an excerpt

" Rau-Baker finds "Team 'Star Trek's'" lack of faith in "Star Wars" disturbing...

Maybe if "Star Trek" had the Force, they could more effectively defend themselves against the random tragedies that seem to beset them. The wormholes, cosmic dust waves, giant blobs of oil and angry rocks are just a few of the things that could be tamed with the Force."

And that's what makes me loose interest. Our universe doesn't have or need "a Force" we face dangers and challenges that we need to solve with ideas, not by getting a godlike pretend power to help us.

Star Trek of course.  It's always better than Star Wars.  The only thing I liked in Star Wars were the little fur balls called Ewoks.  The problem is, the last Star Trek movie was too much like Star Wars to me, which sadden me greatly.  I may rent the latest Trek movie, but from what I'm reading, I'm not sure if I'll enjoy it any more than I did the last one.

In what way was the last Star Trek movie like Star Wars?

In many ways, starting with they blew up Vulcan.  Same plot/story different characters

Umm, there was a little bit more to the two storylines than the planet blowing up.

And anyway, Vulcan imploded.  Alderaan exploded.  Totally different.

I'm not just talking about the blowing up of Vulcan, I'm talking about the whole storyline

You're aware that there are only 7 basic plot-lines, right?

Spock showing up was about the only plot line that was Star Trek.


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service